The Acute Physiological and Perceptual Effects of Individualizing the Recovery Interval Duration Based Upon the Resolution of Muscle Oxygen Consumption During Cycling Exercise

Abstract

Purpose: There has been paucity in research investigating the individualization of recovery interval duration during cycling-based high-intensity interval training (HIIT). The main aim of the study was to investigate whether individualizing the duration of the recovery interval based upon the resolution of muscle oxygen consumption would improve the performance during work intervals and the acute physiological response of the HIIT session, when compared with a standardized (2:1 work recovery ratio) approach. Methods: A total of 16 well-trained cyclists (maximal oxygen consumption: 60 [7] mL·kg−1·min−1) completed 6 laboratory visits: (Visit 1) incremental exercise test, (Visit 2) determination of the individualized (IND) recovery duration, using the individuals’ muscle oxygen consumption recovery duration to baseline from a 4- and 8-minute work interval, (Visits 3–6) participants completed a 6 × 4- and a 3 × 8-minute HIIT session twice, using the IND and standardized recovery intervals. Results: Recovery duration had no effect on the percentage of the work intervals spent at >90% and >95% of maximal oxygen consumption, maximal minute power output, and maximal heart rate, during the 6 × 4- and 3 × 8-minute HIIT sessions. Recovery duration had no effect on mean work interval power output, heart rate, oxygen consumption, blood lactate, and rating of perceived exertion. There were no differences in reported session RPE between recovery durations for the 6 × 4- and 3 × 8-minute HIIT sessions. Conclusion: Individualizing HIIT recovery duration based upon the resolution of muscle oxygen consumption to baseline levels does not improve the performance of the work intervals or the acute physiological response of the HIIT session, when compared with standardized recovery duration.

Influence of Recovery Mode on the Maximum Number of Intervals Until Exhaustion During an Aerobic Interval Training Session

“…However, the study protocols designed by both Fennell and Hopker (16) and Sánchez-Otero et al (33) were not until volitional exhaustion. In line with this, in another investigation, no significant differences were found between AR and PR when comparing different duration recovery intervals during HIIT protocols (17). We have only found 1 study investigating the effects of different AIT running protocols until exhaustion (29).…”

“…In this regard, it is also important to consider that there were no significant differences between conditions regarding RPE values. It is well known that the original Borg Scale (6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20) was concepted to link perception of effort with HR during exercise in an attempt to use RPE for exercise prescription. Therefore, the lower chronotropic response in the PR condition for a similar RPE experienced by our runners may suggest a divergence between HR (objective measure of effort) and RPE (subjective measure of effort).…”

“…The manipulation of recovery characteristics (i.e., AR vs. PR and pause duration) has gained importance in the past years, being yet a topic of debate in the scientific literature with most studies focused on SIT-based protocols (1)(2)(3)10,(38)(39)(40). In this regard, the workto-rest ratio allows the modification of this training variable to assure a proper recovery for successfully performing the subsequent work interval (17,19,34,35). Recently, it has been recommended a high work-to-rest ratio (e.g., 2:1) as work intervals duration decreases for maintaining a high cardiorespiratory stress (i.e., .95% of maximum), while during longer work intervals a high work-torest ratio may elicit anaerobic glycolysis to a greater extent (29).…”

Active vs. passive recovery during an aerobic interval training session in well-trained runners

“…Pause duration is determined by the duration of the bout and its intensity, to allow a proper recovery for successfully performing the subsequent work interval, and it is based on the work-to-rest ratio or the return of some physiological parameters (e.g., heart rate – HR, muscle oxygen consumption) to a set value (Foster et al 2017 ; Schoenmakers et al 2019 ; Schoenmakers and Reed 2019 ; Fennell and Hopker 2021b ). While duration of pauses appears not to be important for the total physiological strain of a HIIT session unless the recovery duration was very short (Smilios et al 2018 ; Schoenmakers et al 2019 ), the intensity of pauses, with selection of active recovery (AR) vs. passive recovery (PR), is an issue which is still under debate.…”

Complex Network Model Reveals the Impact of Inspiratory Muscle Pre-Activation on Interactions among Physiological Responses and Muscle Oxygenation during Running and Passive Recovery

“…We emphasize that muscle oxygenation nodes were highlighted in all graphs plotted for high-intensity scenarios. This suggests that relative concentrations of oxy-, deoxyand total hemoglobin detected by NIRS in one or more muscles may, in fact, deepen the understanding of exercise effects, as indicated by other authors [29,34,77]. In a muscle oxygenation context, special attention has been dedicated to deoxyhemoglobin (HHb), which represents the utilization of O 2 by peripheral tissue and is potentially unaffected by changes in blood volume and arterial hemoglobin concentration in high-intensity exercise [78,79].…”